COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS OF COMPROMISING LEDGER SYSTEM BASED ON BLOCKCHAIN TECHNOLOGY

  • Edis Mekić State University of Novi Pazar, Novi Pazar
  • Safet Purković State University of Novi Pazar, Novi Pazar
  • Ahmedin Lekpek State University of Novi Pazar, Novi Pazar
Keywords: blockchain, ledger, cost benefit analysis

Abstract

Modern application of the blockchain technology is the center of attention of technology and economy sectors. Proper usage of blockchain is based on peer to peer (P2P) network to coordinate a worldwide, universal ledger where all transactions on the network are recorded. In order to provide security and veracity of ledger system blockchain systems uses cryptographic hash function. By hashing the block sent by the member of P2P network and checking if it still fits the pattern for the next block, the network can easily prove that the calculating machine did in fact find coded solution of function. Before adding data received on this way majority of the machines on the network must provide consensual confirmation of transaction. this confirmation must be confirmed with at least 51% of machines in the system. This is first and most analyzed vulnerability of this type of ledger systems based on blockchain. In this research we analyzed cost benefit analysis for implementation of the proposed attack on three popular block chain systems, and proved that investment in equipment for conducting this type f attack is not beneficial for potential attacker.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Apte, S. and Petrovsky, N., 2016. Will blockchain technology revolutionize excipient supply chain management?. Journal of Excipients and Food Chemicals, 7(3), p.910.

Bertoni, G., Daemen, J., Peeters, M. and Van Assche, G., 2009. Keccak sponge function family main document. Submission to NIST (Round 2), 3(30).

Bylica, P., Glen, L., Janiuk, P., Skrzypcaz, A. and Zawlocki, A., 2015. A Probabilistic Nanopayment Scheme for Golem.

Bahack, L., 2013. Theoretical Bitcoin Attacks with less than Half of the Computational Power (draft). arXiv preprint arXiv:1312.7013.

Czepluch, J.S., Lollike, N.Z. and Malone, S.O., 2015. The use of block chain technology in different application domains. Copenhagen: The IT University of Copenhagen.

Davidson, S., De Filippi, P. and Potts, J., 2016. Economics of blockchain.

Desjardins, J., 2016. It’s official: Bitcoin was the top performing currency of 2015. Available at: <http://money.visualcapitalist.com/its-official-bitcoin-was-the-top-performing-currency-of-2015/> [Accessed 17 September 2018].

Ekblaw, A., Azaria, A., Halamka, J.D. and Lippman, A., 2016, August. A Case Study for Blockchain in Healthcare:“MedRec” prototype for electronic health records and medical research data. In Proceedings of IEEE open & big data conference (Vol. 13, p. 13).

Eyal, I. and Sirer, E.G., 2018. Majority is not enough: Bitcoin mining is vulnerable. Communications of the ACM, 61(7), pp.95-102.

Houy, N., 2014. It Will Cost You Nothing to'Kill'a Proof-of-Stake Crypto-Currency.

Nakamoto, S., 2008. Bitcoin: A peer-to-peer electronic cash system.

Naor, M. and Yung, M., 1989, February. Universal one-way hash functions and their cryptographic applications. In Proceedings of the twenty-first annual ACM symposium on Theory of computing (pp. 33-43). ACM.

Rosenfeld, M., 2011. Analysis of bitcoin pooled mining reward systems. arXiv preprint arXiv:1112.4980.

Rosenfeld, M., 2013. Mining pools reward methods. In Presentation at Bitcoin 2013 Conference.

RHorning, 2010. Mining cartel attack. Bitcoin Forum, [blog] 22 December, Available at: < https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2227> [Accessed 15 September 2018].

Sasson, E.B., Chiesa, A., Garman, C., Green, M., Miers, I., Tromer, E. and Virza, M., 2014, May. Zerocash: Decentralized anonymous payments from bitcoin. In 2014 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy (SP) (pp. 459-474). IEEE.

Van Saberhagen, N., 2013. CryptoNote v 2.0.

Zhang, Y. and Wen, J., 2017. The IoT electric business model: Using blockchain technology for the internet of things. Peer-to-Peer Networking and Applications, 10(4), pp.983-994.

Published
2018-12-31
How to Cite
MekićE., PurkovićS., & LekpekA. (2018). COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS OF COMPROMISING LEDGER SYSTEM BASED ON BLOCKCHAIN TECHNOLOGY. BizInfo (Blace) Journal of Economics, Management and Informatics, 9(2), 27-38. https://doi.org/10.5937/bizinfo1802027M